Oct. 30 (Bloomberg) -- AK Steel Corp., a producer of steel
used for automobiles, construction and electrical power
generation, said it persuaded a court that it didn’t infringe a
patent belonging to Luxembourg’s ArcelorMittal SA.

The Luxembourg-based steel producer sued West Chester Ohio-based AK Steel in federal court in Delaware in April, claiming
patent 6,296,805 was infringed. The patent, issued in October
2001 and reissued as RE44153 in April, covers a thermally hot
and cold-rolled steel sheet with a very high resistance.

ArcelorMittal said in court papers that aluminum-coated
boron-containing steel sheets produced by AK Steel infringe the
patents.

U.S. District Judge Sue L. Robinson found that the patent
was invalid because ArcelorMittal violated a ban on broadening a
patent more than two years from its initial issuance, according
to AK Steel’s statement.

ArcelorMittal didn’t respond immediately to an e-mailed
request for comment on the ruling.

The case is A4celorMittal France v. AK Steel Corp., 13-cv-00685, U.S. District Court, District of Delaware
(Wilmington).

For more patent news, click here.

Trademark

Sony Successfully Challenges ‘abt Sony’ Trademark

Sony Corp., the Japanese electronics company, won its
appeal of a decision by India’s deputy registrar of trademarks
to permit AB Textiles of Calcutta to register “abt Sony” as a
trademark, Business Standard reported.

The textile company registered the mark for use with men’s
and women’s undergarments, according to Business Standard.

India’s Intellectual Property Appellate Board said it was
clear the textile company was trying to take unfair advantage of
the fame of the Japanese electronics company, the newspaper
reported.

The board said customers are likely to omit the “abt”
when asking for the Calcutta company’s products, and they will
probably think mistakenly that Sony Corp. is the source of the
products, according to Business Standard.

Endochoice Sues Santarus for Infringement Over Logos

Endochoice Inc., a manufacturer of products used to
diagnose and treat gastrointestinal diseases, filed a trademark
infringement lawsuit against a San Diego-based competitor.

Santarus Inc. is accused of using a logo that infringes
Endochoice’s trademark, according to the complaint filed
yesterday in federal court in New York.

Alpharetta, Georgia-based Endochoice’s mark is a circle
composed of four interlocked crescent moons. The company began
using the mark in 2008 and registered it in 2010, according to
court papers.

Endochoice objects to Santarus’ Uceris trademark, which
also has four crescent moon shapes forming a circle.

The Uceris logo is used for gastroenterology medications
and related medical information, and its similarity to the
Endochoice trademark is likely to confuse both consumers and
medical professionals, Endochoice said in its pleadings.

The Georgia company said it sent Santarus a cease-and-desist letter in June, to no avail. Endochoice asked the court
to order Santarus to stop using the logo, and for the
destruction of all promotional materials containing the mark.

Additionally, Endochoice requested awards of money damages,
including Santarus’s profits related to the alleged
infringement, together with attorney fees and litigation costs.

Santarus didn’t respond immediately to an e-mailed request
for comment on the lawsuit.

The case is Endochoice Inc., v. Santarus Inc. 1:13-cv-07652, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York
(Manhattan).

Hells Angels said that its trademarks have acquired very
widespread recognition “from decades of notoriety.” The marks
“evoke strong and immediate reactions whenever used and as a
result have ‘‘great commercial value,’’ according to court
papers.

The club is no stranger to trademark litigation. Since
2000, Hells Angels have filed more than 15 trademark suits,
according to Bloomberg data.

In this suit against Dillard’s, the club objects to the
manufacture and sale of clothing bearing what they say is a
copycat of their death’s head image.

The club asked the court for an order for the seizure and
destruction of the allegedly infringing merchandise, and awards
of money damages, including profits derived from the sale of the
infringing products. Additionally, Hells Angels requested that
it be awarded attorney fees and litigation costs.

Dillard’s didn’t respond immediately to an e-mailed request
for comment.

The case is Hells Angels Motorcycle Corp. v. 8732 Apparel
LLC., 13-cv-01232, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of
California (Sacramento).

Royal Canadian Legion Reminds Reddit Users of Trademark Rules

Canadian users of Reddit, a social media site to which
users post content, ran afoul of the Royal Canadian legion over
the use of a red poppy image, the Canadian Broadcast Corp.
reported.

The legion, a Canadian veterans’ group, sent Reddit a
cease-and-desist notice, saying the poppy was a registered
trademark requiring permission for use, according to the CBC.

Some Reddit users protested the symbol’s removal, saying
they believed their use of the symbol should have been permitted
as fair use, the CBC reported.

The legion then sent a conciliatory letter saying that
while the poppy symbol is a trademark, the veterans’
organization would like to work with Reddit to raise awareness
of Canada’s Remembrance Day holiday, according to the CBC.

For more trademark news, click here.

Copyright

Copyright Clearance Center Says It Paid $1.4 Billion Royalties

The Copyright Clearance Center, a rights-licensing
organization, said in a statement that it has paid out $1.4
billion in royalties to rights holders during the past 10 years.

The Danvers, Massachusetts-based organization said that in
fiscal year 2013, it has paid $188.7 million in royalties, a 5
percent increase from the previous year.

The center, founded in 1978, licenses protected content to
businesses and academic institutions.

Graffiti Artists to Get Hearing on Request to Block Demolition

A group of graffiti artists known as 5Pointz who sued a New
York real-estate developer to block destruction of a building
covered with their work persuaded a federal judge to issue an
order temporarily blocking demolition efforts.

The artists sued in federal court in Brooklyn, New York, on
Oct. 20, claiming their works were protected under the Visual
Artists Rights Act and copyright law.

The developers, based in Edgewood, New York, had planned to
tear down a building in Queens, New York, in order to build a
1,000-unit apartment complex.

In his Oct. 28 ruling, U.S. District Judge Frederic Block
set hearings for Nov. 6 to Nov. 8 on the artists’ request for an
order barring the destruction of the building. He also extended
a temporary order against the demolition he issued Oct. 7 to
stay in effect through Nov. 12.

The case is Cohen v. G&M Realty LP, 13-cv-05612, U.S.
District Court, Eastern District of New York (Brooklyn).